Cited by 322Ion Transport and Channel RegulationBarrier Structure and Function StudiesCerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus

Brain Extracellular Space: The Final Frontier of Neuroscience

Open access
Nicholson, Charles, Hrabětová, Sabina·2017·Biophysical Journal

Abstract

Brain extracellular space is the narrow microenvironment that surrounds every cell of the central nervous system. It contains a solution that closely resembles cerebrospinal fluid with the addition of extracellular matrix molecules. The space provides a reservoir for ions essential to the electrical activity of neurons and forms an intercellular chemical communication channel. Attempts to reveal the size and structure of the extracellular space using electron microscopy have had limited success; however, a biophysical approach based on diffusion of selected probe molecules has proved useful. A point-source paradigm, realized in the real-time iontophoresis method using tetramethylammonium, as well as earlier radiotracer methods, have shown that the extracellular space occupies ∼20% of brain tissue and small molecules have an effective diffusion coefficient that is two-fifths that in a free solution. Monte Carlo modeling indicates that geometrical constraints, including dead-space microdomains, contribute to the hindrance to diffusion. Imaging the spread of macromolecules shows them increasingly hindered as a function of size and suggests that the gaps between cells are predominantly ∼40 nm with wider local expansions that may represent dead-spaces. Diffusion measurements also characterize interactions of ions and proteins with the chondroitin and heparan sulfate components of the extracellular matrix; however, the many roles of the matrix are only starting to become apparent. The existence and magnitude of bulk flow and the so-called glymphatic system are topics of current interest and controversy. The extracellular space is an exciting area for research that will be propelled by emerging technologies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bpj.2017.06.052

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The relative abundance of CS isomers incorporated into CS-GAG chains has been linked to key biological functions within the brain, including charged molecule diffusion (0S-CS), neurocircuit plasticity (4S-CS and 6S-CS), glial scarring (4S6S-CS), and neurite outgrowth (2S6S-CS).

    “The relative abundance of CS isomers incorporated into the CS-GAG chains has been linked to key biological functions within the brain including charged molecule diffusion (0S-CS (Nicholson & Hrabětová 2017)), neurocircuit plasticity (4S-CS and 6S-CS (Miyata et al. 2012; Yang et al. 2021)), glial scarring (4S6S-CS (Brown et al. 2012)), and neurite outgrowth (2S6S-CS (Shida et al. 2019; Clement et a”

    From Perineuronal net deglycosylation associates with tauopathy‐induced gliosis and neurodegeneration (2024) · cites this paper as Nicholson & Hrabětová 2017

    The citation to Nicholson and Hrabětová is attached to charged-molecule diffusion (0S-CS), not the other functions in the sentence. In “Extracellular matrix and the control of ECS properties” (page unavailable), the paper reports that chondroitin sulfate affects Ca2+ diffusion, but it does not identify the 0S-CS isomer or link its relative abundance to that effect. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nicholson, C., & Hrabětová, S.
Affiliations
  • SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University (US)
  • State University of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Nicholson, Charles
Venue
Biophysical Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-11
Volume
113
Issue
10
Pages
2133-2142
ISSN
0006-3495 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2737379596
Cited by
321
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 3
FWCI
2.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biophysical Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Health (NIH) National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) (R01-NS047557)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Ion Transport and Channel Regulation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Cerebrospinal fluid and hydrocephalus
Keywords
brain extracellular space, extracellular matrix, cerebrospinal fluid, Monte Carlo simulation, diffusion coefficient, macromolecular diffusion, intercellular spaces, chondroitin sulfate, heparan sulfate, bulk flow, glymphatic system
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Diffusion, Extracellular Space, Humans, Neurosciences, Molecular Imaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review